In a press release statement, Tillerson wrote, "The United States does not recognize the Kurdistan Regional Government’s unilateral referendum held on Monday. The vote and the results lack legitimacy and we continue to support a united, federal, democratic and prosperous Iraq."

The release continued:

We remain concerned about the potential negative consequences of this unilateral step. Prior to the vote, we worked with both the KRG and the central government in Baghdad to pursue a more productive framework and to promote stability and prosperity for the people ‎of the Kurdistan region. These aspirations, ultimately, cannot be advanced through unilateral measures such as this referendum.

We urge calm and an end to vocal recriminations and threats of reciprocal actions. We urge Iraqi Kurdish authorities to respect the constitutionally-mandated role of the central government and we call upon the central government to reject threats or even allusion to possible use of force. The United States asks all parties, including Iraq’s neighbors, to reject unilateral actions and the use of force.

The fight against ISIS/ Daesh is not over, and extremist groups are seeking to exploit instability and discord. We urge our Iraqi partners to remain focused on defeating ISIS/Daesh.

We encourage all sides to engage constructively in a dialogue to improve the future of all Iraqis.

Maybe France should have issued a similar statement to the American colonies under King George III of Britain, but I digress.

No "recognized" government in the Middle East has ever treated the Kurdish people fairly.

It should be obvious why the Kurdish people want to establish self-government in the region this ethnic group has occupied for centuries.

Yet, without a world "superpower" to advocate for their inherent right to self-govern; without a world "superpower" to uphold the principle that "whenever any form of government becomes destructive," to the ends of destroying unalienable rights and the people do not consent to be governed in such a manner, " it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness," the Kurdish people will not be able to seek their independence from ruthless governments.

Tillerson cites the ongoing fight against ISIS as a reason to reject Kurdish independence, calling these independence seekers "extremists groups." Tillerson expresses "support" a "united, federal, democratic and prosperous Iraq." When has there ever been such a thing? Iraq was considered "stable" as long as American troops were stationed within its borders. Once American troops withdrew, the "united, federal, democratic and prosperous Iraq" went to hell in a

"From the end of World War I to the Gulf War in 1990, the Kurds in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria fought separate guerrilla campaigns to achieve autonomy. All of the campaigns were forcibly put down and the Kurdish people suffered greater repression each time."

It appears the Kurdish people tried that approach, but failed because of the lack of a "superpower" to back their independence movement, or a nation of influence, such as the united States, during the time prior to World War II.

But, where was the united States in advocating for the independence of the Kurdish region that had seen terrible injustices wreaked upon it through the centuries prior?

The Kurds do not want to be under the "rule" of Iraq, Iran, or Turkey because these states are steeped in Islamic government.

The region does not want to be ruled by ISIS, which the Kurds have been fighting for quite some time before the US lent its support to the Kurds.

The Kurdish people do not want to be ruled by the government in Syria.

The Kurdish people ask no more than to have supported their inherent right to self-government; but, these people are being told by a government based on the recognition and upholding of inherent rights and self-evident truths their vote is illegitimate.

The only reason the government of the united States, through Rex Tillerson, is conveying that message to the Kurdish people is for political reasons based on harebrained politics supporting Islamic governments steeped in suppression and oppression.

Is it not ironic that a world superpower has the final decision on whether a people should be self-governing or not?

With France being a significant bearer of power in the 18th century, the united States could have easily remained a colony of Great Britain had the enemy of King George III denied our declaration of independence and denied our founders its support.

But, alas, the Kurdish people do not have a Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin to send to the US to make their case.

Instead, the Kurdish people have to rely only on the history of the founding of the united States with which to rest their pleas.

The response the Kurds have received from the US through Tillerson is shameful.

"You can't expect those countries over there to give up land for a Kurdish country, Suzanne; that's ridiculous."

The only problem here is the political trappings the united States has entered regarding the Middle East, with the oil and gas, along with other secretive missives that no one can understand without a roadmap that inexplicably runs around in circles.

Could it have to do with the drawing of imaginary borders 100 years ago on a map? No one really knows.

One thing is certain – the Kurdish people have every right to establish their independence at whatever time they deem appropriate from governments that have inflicted terrible wrongs against them.

When the fight with ISIS is over, if it ever will be, are the Kurdish people to expect support for their independence from the united States government.

The US government had from World War I to the Gulf War to support an independent Kurdish nation, but remained silent.

It had the numerous years after the Gulf War throughout the occupation of Iraq to the battle against ISIS to support an independent Kurdish nation, but did not. History seems clear. The

The united States government no longer holds freedom and liberty as a lamp upon the hill for any people seeking independence from oppressive regimes to clamor toward and gain support.

Instead, it hides away freedom and liberty to support repressive regimes in a region where the politics outweigh human rights and self-evident truths.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

About the AuthorSuzanne Hamner

Suzanne Hamner (pen name) is a registered nurse, grandmother of 4, and a political independent residing in the state of Georgia, who is trying to mobilize the Christian community in her area to stand up and speak out against tyrannical government, invasion by totalitarian political systems masquerading as religion and get back to the basics of education.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.